Within an operations environment of a business, there are typically multiple domains of information that become critical to the day-to-day operations and future planning for the business. These data domains may include, for example, clients, accounts, opportunities, contracts, delivery centers, work pools, workgroups, etc., and often begin by not having an association to new data domains. These data domains are sometimes invented or registered as stop-gap approaches, as alternatives to using common reference data. Some data domains are housed in data marts that link them together, while many other data domains end up being managed independently, stored independently, and un-correlated, which creates business transparency issues that may result in a lack of exposure in reporting, analytics, planning, etc. Locally maintained data control lists become increasingly integrated with local business processes, information technology (IT) systems, and data marts, but the lists never become integrated with a globally focused hub of data domains so that transparency exists across common reference keys between enterprise data sources and local data sources. The end result is that geography, country, and department teams invest in local resources that manage these local data control lists and cross-enterprise analytics are constrained because of integration with various data domains that were never built or designed with cross linkage in mind.
Furthermore, there are times when a business must maintain a pre-final version and/or a final-alternative version of a data record set to support the business. These data record sets may be used in reporting, cross-mapping, and analytics, which goes beyond a use of one master reference set of data records for a data domain. For example, these data records might be used in the following scenarios: (1) a sales planning team needs to construct a pre-final sales focus client list that is different from a present base dataset; (2) a final-alternative version of an account list exists that has geo-customized attributes due to local data standard variants needed to support geo/local business operations data; and (3) an organization processes data under a specific point of view, which results in cross-maps that use only a subset of master reference maps. The known approach to the aforementioned scenarios is for local business staff and/or IT support teams to create local extracts of trusted data sources and manage and share the adapted lists by a person-to-person email exchange with no ability for collaborating business users to access the alternative lists centrally on-demand and/or cross map the data in these alternatives.